Sergino Dest will start.

That was the biggest news coming out of Thursday afternoon's news conference with United States men's coach Gregg Berhalter in advance of the team's Friday night match against Mexico at MetLife Stadium.

"He's doing great in camp," the manager said of the 18-year-old Ajax defender. "He's going to start the game tomorrow. It's a great opportunity for us ... to give him an opportunity with the first team. That's what's nice about this story."

Dest, who was born and raised in the Netherlands but whose father is a U.S. citizen, has enjoyed a strong start to the season in the Eredivisie with the Ajax senior team after coming up through their youth ranks.

- O'Hanlon: Could Dest be U.S. Soccer's 'Next Big Thing'?

He also featured for the U.S. U20s during their run to the quarterfinals of the Under-20 World Cup earlier this summer.

"It's not about, to me, the dual nationalism of him. It's about that he's come from our programming and he's performed well. He's really achieved something in this short month at Ajax, and it's nice to be able to reward that."

- Stream games LIVE on ESPN+
- Inter Miami FC: How the franchise is shaping up
- MLS Confidential: The definitive player poll

Berhalter said his team was looking forward to the challenge of taking on their regional rival, while admitting that Mexico represented a formidable opponent.

"We're both in a position where we're battling for supremacy in CONCACAF," he said. "We're both trying to be the top team. I think right now, Mexico is slightly ahead of us, having beaten us in the last game and having performed well over the last few years.

"But when we play them you see the intensity takes a different level. Everything is up a level. The intensity of the game is up. The tackles are a little bit harder. And these are special games. It's always an occasion to be playing against Mexico."

In their last match, the Americans lost 1-0 to Mexico in the final of the Gold Cup. Friday night's affair represents a chance to alter the game plan and get a result.

"That's the beauty of playing them in the next game," Berhalter said. "You get to make adjustments. You get to look at what you want to work on, how you want to work."

One of the more controversial decisions from that Gold Cup roster was the absence of teenage forward Josh Sargent. On Thursday, Berhalter explained why the Werder Bremen attacker was left off the roster and how he recovered to make this one.

"At the time, seeing Josh and having him in camp, we thought the best decision was to leave him off the roster," he said. "And, I think the rest is how the player responds. It's not us making these decisions that can change the course of history. It's entirely up to the player and how he responds.

"I would say Josh responded in the fashion that we'd expect or that we'd want. He was very motivated. He used the time to first rest, and then attack the season."

The U.S. head coach also talked about how he plans to deploy star Christian Pulisic.

"We want to put him in position to be able to help our team and affect the game," he said. "He's got a great skill set. He's a game-changer. We want to put him in position to get the ball and hurt the opponent."

At the end of a very long, very hot summer in which it felt like every day was Groundhog Day, another performance played out in public and in the press as if they were all stuck in Punxsutawney.

FC Barcelona didn't buy Neymar, but he still cost them.

Again.

Two years after Neymar walked out, mere days following vice-president Jordi Mestre saying he was staying "200 percent," president Josep Maria Bartomeu insisting he was "relaxed" about it and Gerard Piqué announcing "se queda" -- words so famous and so wrong they became a meme that needs no translation -- he decided that he wanted to walk back in again. And so, Barcelona, who'd been made to look silly once before, and who are due in court against him in 22 days' time, decided to help him do just that. Or did they?

The headlines provided a timeline to a story that never ended even when, at last, it did, to the satisfaction of pretty much no one. Take the Catalan daily Sport: "FINAL MOVE FOR NEYMAR," its front cover shouted. We could go back months and months but we've all got things to do, so let's cut to the chase, expressed like a cartoon strip across their covers.

- The definitive story of the Neymar saga
- Ogden: CL draw reaction for biggest teams
- Lowe: 'New' Real Madrid looks just like the old

The above line was printed on July 31 and it was followed by an "ULTIMATUM FOR NEYMAR" -- on Aug. 12, two weeks later. So it can't have been that final a move and it can't have been that much of an ultimatum because it didn't end there. But the next day Neymar was pressing to go now! Well, maybe not now exactly but he was closer, they said the day after that.

Closer, but not close enough. A week later, he was in the same place he'd always been. He was, though, MORE OPTIMISTIC. That was Aug. 21 and two days later, there was a "FINAL MOVE FOR NEYMAR" (stop us if you've heard that one before) that wasn't exactly final either.

Neymar was "ON THE VERGE" of signing on Aug. 28. And so, Aug. 29 was "NEYMAR DAY" unlike all those other days, eh. Only, it wasn't of course. The next day was "FRENETIC." The day after they were "ON THE LIMIT." And then, well... then it was over.

Or not.

On the morning of deadline day, Sport (and everyone else) announced that while it was over, it wasn't completely over: Neymar could come in 2020 instead, which means we get to do it all over again.

At least Barcelona's players could forget it for a moment. They'd all been sick of it. Ernesto Valverde had admitted a few days before that he was desperate for Sept. 2 to come and leave it all behind. Asked how tired he was of it all on a scale of 0 to 10, he replied: "nine and a half." The only real surprise was that half that wasn't sick of it all.

All that drama and in the end, they hadn't even got him. The dream of an absurdly good forward line -- we'll work out where to actually put them all later -- was gone.

And that probably isn't even the worst part.

The next day, Sport ran a cover of Neymar, head down, looking sad. "Sunk," it said. He wasn't the only one affected and it's worth asking what damage this might have done, and what damage it may still do.

In the midst of it all, with Neymar dominating everything -- plans, ideas, the mental space they inhabited and, let's not be naïve here, team selection too -- Barcelona had dropped five points. That can't be attributed solely to Neymar, but it can't have helped either, and those points aren't coming back. Sure, Valverde was joking. Sort of. But many a true word said in jest and all that.

Neymar's departure had thrown his plans upon arrival. Valverde adapted the Barca squad, rebuilt it and won -- it is worth reminding people how unexpected that was at the time -- but two years on, Neymar appeared again, plans in the air once more. He could have done with Neymar then; he could have done without Neymar now.

Meanwhile, Barcelona hadn't come out of this looking good just as they didn't two years ago, when they emerged as weak, powerless and unable to exercise control. In 2019, they played this out publicly: those headlines are not about sport, easy though it is to giggle at them; they are about the clubs, about Neymar, about the game. The media knew which flights Barcelona were on, which hotels they were in and what time their meetings were. At least in part, because that's the way Barcelona wanted it.

There was something exaggerated about it all: a show, a charade even, like they wanted it to look like they were trying: especially, it has been suggested, to Neymar and to Lionel Messi, who really wanted his friend back. His friend and, let's not forget, possibly the best player he has played with. Even if maybe they actually weren't trying.

PSG had always suspected Barcelona didn't have the means to make this happen. There was no place to put Neymar and no money to pay for him, but Barca had to be seen to try. And the truth is that in the end, they might have quite enjoyed leaving him stuck. "Sunk?" That might have made some at Barcelona smile. So, this guy who left us in the lurch, made us look stupid, took us to court and then begged to return is unhappy? Good. So PSG are lumbered with him, having publicly said they wanted to sell, with the fans against him and everyone hating him after he effectively let it be known that he screwed up two years ago and wishes he had never left, making him the bad guy, not us? Even better.

The idea has been floated on these pages before: what if this was a brilliantly clever, Machiavellian act of cold, cold revenge on Barcelona's part? It's a neat idea, but it suggests a level of cunning that, honestly, it doesn't seem realistic to concede.

If there was something in it to start with, if the pursuit was a little half-hearted -- we know it wasn't originally planned as you don't sign Antoine Griezmann if you're actually going for Neymar -- the risk of Madrid getting him, a risk probably engineered by his camp, changed the game a little. And even if the outcome may actually be quite good and even what they wanted most deep down -- he stays in Paris, unhappier than ever, doesn't join Madrid and is prepared to try again in the future when Barcelona ready for it -- the cost is high.

If it was a plan, it was not without its losses.

Neymar coming might have been a problem; Neymar not coming, having pursued him, is a problem too. Even if it was a plan, Barcelona haven't come out of this looking good. "We're close," one director said, but they weren't. They made offers they couldn't make, with money they didn't have, and they didn't get their man. A man, it is worth noting, if only because it seems to get overlooked so readily, even gleefully, who is still a hell of a footballer. Not having him costs. More than just the absence. They have paid no money, but Barcelona might yet pay a heavy price.

Barcelona have also irritated those that wanted Neymar to come and those that didn't. Rebuilding some of those bridges may not be easy.

"Neymar did everything he could to return," said Luis Suárez. Perhaps it's a stretch but it's not difficult to read implicit in those words: the club, on the other hand, didn't. Suárez and Messi wanted him, as did other dressing room heavyweights; they have been let down. That Barcelona pursued him underlines this unhappiness, which in itself can't be an easy idea for Griezmann to digest. Think about it: you arrive as a star and they're agitating for someone else to arrive who plays where you do?

It's an even more difficult idea for Ousmane Dembele, the player Bartomeu said was better than Neymar and then tried to get to leave to bring Neymar back. He now knows he's expendable, that the president's word is worthless, that no-one stood up for him, no-one defended him and no-one fought for him to continue. Just as Philippe Coutinho was expendable, even without Neymar eventually arriving. That's almost €300 million of footballers they tried to shift out on the cheap. The very same ones they brought to replace Neymar.

So how do you mend that? Barcelona offered PSG players without even asking those players first. Then they set about trying to push them to the door.

A club is not just players, it is people.

PORTLAND, Ore. -- It's about three hours to go until the kickoff of the Portland Timbers' biggest game of the year, a Cascadia Cup clash against their bitter rivals, the Seattle Sounders. The match is arguably the pinnacle of Major League Soccer's Rivalry Week on a balmy Friday night.

On the surface, all appears normal. But the Timbers Army (TA), in conjunction with their Sounders counterparts, the Emerald City Supporters and Gorilla FC, have planned a protest over MLS's in-stadium ban on political signage. The league has banned the waving of any flag it deems political, including the Iron Front, a logo consisting of three arrows pointing down and to the left. The Iron Front was an anti-Nazi paramilitary group from the 1930s but is now connected with the growing "Antifa" (anti-fascism) movement in the U.S., which is comprised of amorphous, autonomous groups that stand in opposition to fascism and far-right ideology.

- MLS Power Rankings: Philly, Atlanta surge into top three
- Marshall: Vela proves his commitment to LAFC
- Among the Chugs: Phoenix Rising's undefeated dollar beer night

At the Fanladen, the de facto clubhouse of the Timbers Army, Sheba Rawson is attending to her duties as president of the 107ist, the organizational arm of the TA and the Rose City Riveters, the supporters of the NWSL's Portland Thorns. At the moment, this consists mainly of making sure the denizens of the Timbers Army section get their tickets with minimum fuss.

Rawson's choice of jewelry, a pair of yellow earrings in the shape of the Iron Front symbol, confirms where she stands on the issue: the image is one of inclusion.

"That's the flag we would like to fly," says Rawson. "It's an odd thing for the league to send a message that that flag is offensive. If I can't make that appeal to [the front office] we have to do the one thing we can do, which is to take away the value that we add to the business."

The MLS Fan Code of Conduct prohibits fans from "using (including on any sign or other visible representation) political, threatening, abusive, insulting, offensive language and/or gestures, which includes racist, homophobic, xenophobic, sexist or otherwise inappropriate language or behavior." In MLS's eyes, "antifa" is a political organization, meaning the flying of any flag connected to it is forbidden.

Hours earlier, the three groups put out a statement that they not only want the ban on the Iron Front flag lifted, they want the word "political" removed from the league's Fan Code of Conduct, as well as to work with human rights experts on a new version that ensures fan safety. Their stance is backed by the Independent Supporters Council, an umbrella organization advocating for supporter groups in MLS.

So the groups have a unique kind of protest planned. There will be no colorful "tifo" banners hoisted before the match. For the first 33 minutes -- an ode to 1933, the year the Iron Front was banned by the Nazis -- the supporter groups from both teams will be silent. No chants, no singing, no drumming.

The irony of the standoff is that in a bid to differentiate itself from other North American sports leagues, MLS has long cultivated a fan culture that is urban, edgier and more progressive, as evidenced by the advertisements hyping up the league. Portland and Seattle are prime examples of this passion, but the tension surrounding both sets of supporters invokes the sense that MLS is trying to curtail precisely the kind of supporter culture -- including the political statements that some ascribe to -- that it has coveted and cultivated since year one.

No fan group is monolithic, of course, and so it proves with the Timbers fans in attendance. At the main entrance to the Timbers Army section, Daniel Ribeiro is among the fans waiting for the gates to open. He's wearing a vest with a message pinned to the back that reads "This Mustache Kills Fascists," a parody of the saying "This Machine Kills Fascists" popularized by folk singer Woody Guthrie in the 1940s, and altered by the Gypsy punk band Gogol Bordello.

Ribeiro is fully in support of the Timbers Army's stance. The latest instance of demonstrations in Portland involving the alt-right group the Proud Boys and antifa are on his mind.

"Its a symbol of inclusion," said Ribeiro about the Iron Front flag. "It's a symbol that's against a lot of the hate and angry rhetoric and fascist intents that we've been seeing from a lot of ultra-right-wing groups that have been coming to our town doing these things. It's also a symbol that we've used at the stadium here for years. It's not a symbol of hate."

That support is universal at this entrance to the stadium, but it's less fervent at other gates.

"I'm not a fan of antifa," said Portland resident Jim Keyes, as he prepared to enter Providence Park. "They're a counter group, the Proud Boys are just as bad. The whole thing is just kind of a mess for Portland. If you want to protest, protest. But you don't have to be violent, you don't have to be destructive, you don't have to be a jerk about it."

While one fan who declined to be identified said he thinks the protest is "stupid, I'm here to watch a soccer game," half of the 20 people approached by ESPN weren't even aware that a protest was about to take place, or that it was about the Iron Front flag.

Providence Park is known for its noise and energy, giving it one of the best fan atmospheres in North America. But for the first half-hour, the protest is having its intended effect as the crowd is oddly quiet. An occasional "Let's Go Timbers!" chant rings out. Even when Seattle's Cristian Roldan puts the Sounders ahead in the 22nd minute, the noise level isn't near what one would expect, and there are signs of subtle protest, too. Three fans mimic the Iron Front symbol by holding giant, pink cardboard cutouts of arrows, pointing them down and to the left. A banner in the north end has "Fe," the chemical symbol for iron, and then the word "Front" underneath it.

As the game clock strikes 33:00, flags of all kinds sprout up from the crowd and the volume turns up to 11. The Timbers Army belts out "Bella Ciao," an Italian anti-fascist anthem, and doesn't stop until halftime. The number of Iron Front flags visible easily reaches double figures. Their Seattle counterparts respond in kind and the atmosphere reaches a level you'd expect from this intense rivalry. The fact that the game ends with Seattle winning 2-1 is almost secondary.

Afterwards, Portland defender Zarek Valentin addressed the media wearing a T-shirt with the Iron Front logo, while Seattle goalkeeper Stefan Frei voiced his support for the stance the fans had taken. Two days later when the Thorns took on the Chicago Red Stars, the Rose City Riveters displayed the Iron Front flag. Christine Sinclair showed up at the stadium in an Iron Front t-shirt.

Ask members of the Timbers Army when the Iron Front flag first started being displayed at Portland matches, and no one can give an exact answer. However, it's been a presence for years, usually draped next to the "Timbers Army" banner near the capo stand in Providence Park's north end.

The Timbers Army isn't alone. As recently as 2017, support for anti-fascism has been spotted at stadiums in New York, Montreal and Dallas. Fans of NYCFC have expressed concerns to team management about the presence of far-right elements at their home matches.

The flag's presence didn't become problematic until this season, when MLS's effort to revamp its Fan Code of Conduct was completed. In recent years, the league noticed that signs that espoused what it called "political views" were visible in its stadium and decided to ban them. MLS instructed its teams before the season that displaying the Iron Front image would be prohibited.

"The vast majority of MLS fans are there to enjoy the game," said MLS president and deputy commissioner Mark Abbott via phone. "As part of the Fan Code of Conduct, the league and the clubs believe that the promotion of outside political organizations in our stadiums is not appropriate."

The Fan Code of Conduct says a display of political signage is a "threat to the safety of the event," but a statement put out by the Timbers front office on Aug. 19 revealed another motivation. They don't want it seen on television.

"For obvious reasons banners and signs are widely visible to the broader stadium and television audience and thusly fall under a different set of guidelines," the statement read.

Adding the ban on political signage to the Fan Code of Conduct seems to be a solution in search of a problem, especially when signs that explicitly state positions like "anti-fascist" or "anti-racism" are still allowed. Fans are also allowed to wear the Iron Front symbol on T-shirts.

During an Aug. 4 match against D.C. United, Philadelphia Union midfielder Alejandro Bedoya yelled into an on-field mic, "Congress, do something now. End gun violence. Let's go!" Bedoya's plea not only went unpunished by the league, he was named MLS Player of the Week.

The flag's presence would have likely gone unnoticed by the majority of fans had MLS not made the change to the Fan Code of Conduct. Now the ban has become amplified, with some fans at other MLS stadiums showing solidarity through the hashtag #AUnitedFront.

"MLS is stepping into exactly the same trap that the NFL did with Colin Kaepernick," said Laurent Dubois, a history professor at Duke University and author of the blog Soccer Politics. "After he kneeled for the anthem, if the NFL said, 'We respect people's right to free speech. That's great, and he's an individual who has opinions,' the whole thing would basically have gone away.

"In [Portland's] case, it's only going to raise the stakes for this, and I think MLS is only going to have more confrontations because I think it's very unlikely that fan groups will easily relent on this point."

More than one MLS executive has pointed out that other North American sports leagues are not as tolerant of signage in their stadiums, though this is usually spelled out at the team or stadium level and not as a league-wide policy. But MLS has reduced what is permissible, rather than maintaining or expanding it. That stance has led to allegations that MLS (intentionally or not) is sending a signal to alt-right elements that they are welcome. The presence of Proud Boys members at a Seattle Sounders pregame March to the Match on Aug. 4 is often cited as proof, though MLS argues that it has no control over what happens outside its stadiums.

"That's just patently untrue," said Abbott about the allegations. "If you take a look at our Soccer For All campaign, our commitment to issues of diversity and inclusion are strong. We have a strong record of opposing racism, homophobia and xenophobia, and the thought that the league, in any way, shape or form is supportive of hate speech or hate groups is just not true. We condemn all hate speech."

There are certainly instances of MLS backing up its words with action. It has suspended players for using homophobic slurs on the field. Real Salt Lake recently fired manager Mike Petke for a post-game tirade at officials that included a series of homophobic slurs. In 2014, the Timbers were the first professional sports team to support Oregon's gay marriage equality law.

But whether MLS likes it or not, the fact remains that its stance has struck a nerve in the Pacific Northwest, especially given the demonstrations that have taken place between alt-right groups and antifa, which in some cases have turned violent. The feeling that fans who are part of marginalized groups are now feeling less safe isn't going to go away.

"These types of policies ignore the fact that there are whole groups of people that enter those stadiums that are not allowed to be apolitical," said Brenda Elsey, an associate professor of history at Hofstra University, and a contributor to the podcast "Burn It All Down."

She added, "Alexi Lalas is fine," in reference to the Fox Sports analyst who tweeted out his support of the league's policy. "I'm sorry if he's not enjoying seeing those signs. But there's a whole lot of people that don't get to leave that outside. So I think this policy is insensitive to that fact."

In addition to her academic duties, Elsey is the lead development officer in the Americas for the FARE Network, an organization that seeks to combat inequality and bigotry in the sport of soccer. She acknowledges that athletes, from Kaepernick to the Cal women's basketball team wearing "Black Lives Matter" shirts in 2014, have long been advocates for social change, and these protests are largely a result of grassroots movements.

But protests like the one in Portland are a relatively new phenomenon at sporting events in the U.S. Last year, a grassroots movement helped keep the Columbus Crew in Ohio's capital. More recently, "Equal pay!" chants could be heard at the Women's World Cup final. In the 1990s, fans of the New York/New Jersey MetroStars (now the New York Red Bulls) fended off an attempt by far-right elements to maintain a presence in the stands.

What made Portland's protest different was that it saw rival sets of fans working together in a highly coordinated way to drive home their message of anti-fascism and anti-racism.

"Historically, you see more anti-Nazi, anti-fascist protests where there are more neo-Nazis and neo-fascists, like in Europe," said Elsey. "I think what is going on here is pretty new for the U.S. because for the most part that kind of far-right wing activity hasn't been part of U.S. soccer culture."

There's also the fact that whatever remains of the boundary involving sport, politics and social issues, it is eroding further due to the intersection of government policies, their impact on minority communities and the decidedly multi-cultural bent of MLS supporter culture.

"I think a lot of these things are connecting, and it feels like fascism," said Elsey. "There's a reason that people are feeling particularly sensitive about keeping MLS and keeping U.S. Soccer away from that. It's about making people feel safe."

Talking to people in the Timbers organization, there is a sense that they are caught in the crossfire. While the Timbers have publicly supported the policy, there is a feeling that the rollout by MLS was poorly communicated and that there wasn't enough direct engagement with fans. It was the Timbers front office that pushed the league to have the "anti-fascist" and "anti-racism" signs allowed. One portion of the Timbers' aforementioned statement hints at how the club is attempting to straddle the issue.

"We didn't make the rule banning the Iron Front on signs but we understand it and support it," the statement read.

Some in the Timbers organization feel it is taking the hit while the league sits in the background, angst that is exacerbated by the fact that the Timbers front office and the Timbers Army are largely in alignment in terms of their values.

This frustration seemed to get the better of Timbers owner Merritt Paulson after Portland's game that night. Sources confirmed that in one exchange with a fan, he stated he was none too happy with the Timbers Army silent protest, and felt it had undercut the team's home-field advantage. By the next morning, a clearer perspective had taken root.

"Our fans are and will always be the heart of our club," Paulson told ESPN. "We respect their decision to make their voice heard or not heard in this case. I also proudly stand by the ideals of the Timbers. We have a long history that speaks louder than words."

The fans are frustrated as well, though obviously for different reasons. MLS told ESPN that a cross section of owners and executives at both league and team level have decided what crosses the line and what doesn't, but the vague nature of the word "political" has led to confusion and uneven enforcement at matches. What exactly constitutes political? Is the rainbow flag used by the LGBTQ community political? (In an interview with ESPN last month, MLS commissioner Don Garber said it isn't, though he declined to discuss other examples of what is deemed "political.") Then there are the military appreciation nights with political overtones.

At an Aug. 17 game at Dignity Health Sports Park between the LA Galaxy and the Sounders, ECS co-president Shawn Wheeler had an "Anti-Fascist, Anti-Racist, Always Seattle" banner -- seemingly within the rules -- confiscated because according to MLS the banner wasn't cleared with stadium security beforehand. (The slogan has been championed by the ECS and was recently co-opted by the Sounders organization, even featuring as the text on the team pennant for the recent trip to Portland.)

Wheeler confirmed to ESPN that the banner was snuck in after being told he couldn't bring it inside. He contends that after unveiling the banner in the first half he was approached by someone wearing an MLS credential and was told, "We want both sides to be able to come and watch games without politics." When the banner was shown again in the second half, he was ejected.

Abbott said he hadn't been able to corroborate that the exchange between Wheeler and the MLS employee took place, but said that, "if the implication is that we want to allow people who are espousing hate speech or white supremacy or anything like that, that's not something we are looking to allow in our stadiums and we wholeheartedly condemn it."

Wheeler isn't altering his stance in any way, despite getting ejected.

"I have no regrets about sneaking the banner in," Wheeler says. "I'm proud to say that I'm anti-racist and anti-fascist. If [MLS] wants to kick us out for saying that, then we're going to get kicked out of a lot of places."

ECS co-president Tom Biro added about the ban on the Iron Front flag, "[MLS] is slicing this really thin. It's honestly too nebulous, and what we saw on [Aug. 23] was inconsistency from staff. We had other [non-Iron Front banners] go up, and staff thought they were supposed to come down. That's where there's too much gray area, and it's not getting any better."

As protests go, the three supporters groups achieved what they wanted at Providence Park that night. Biro said the protest "went 100 percent the way we would have liked it to go in the planning. It was extremely effective." He noted that one ECS member was ejected while another, when given the option of giving up their Iron Front flags or leaving, chose to leave. No Timbers fans were ejected or sanctioned for flying the flag, though the Timbers Army was given a general warning by the club.

So what's next? One encouraging sign was that the TA had talks with the Timbers and Thorns front office to discuss the ban on displaying the Iron Front flag. That counted as good news. Talking is preferable to not talking. Abbott added that a meeting is planned with supporter groups from around the league to discuss the Fan Code of Conduct.

But the chances of a compromise have since taken a hit. Last Saturday, at the Timbers' home match against Real Salt Lake, the Iron Front banners were displayed once again when the clock struck 33:00. In response, MLS and the Timbers issued three-match bans to "a handful" of fans for waving the flag.

When asked if MLS would budge from its position, Abbott responded with a simple, "No," before repeating the league's stance that political signage isn't allowed in its stadiums. The supporter groups aren't backing down either. Rawson said that if the current level of escalation isn't enough, they are prepared to take things further, though what that exactly entails she wouldn't say.

"We can appeal on moral grounds or business grounds," she said. "We have options for escalation in both of those arenas if we need to. Here's the thing. None of us want to. We think it's a very simple fix. It wouldn't be a hard thing to walk it back and say, 'You know what? We didn't think this through. Oh my gosh. We didn't know this was so important.' And you could buy so much good will with some of the most ardent supporters."

Rawson admitted her biggest fear is that it will take so long for MLS and the Timbers to understand what's at stake that "something beautiful will be destroyed."

Perhaps that sounds melodramatic, but Rawson isn't thinking of the Timbers Army, the Timbers or MLS specifically, but of the supporter culture that has taken 24 seasons to cultivate, one that includes taking stands on human rights issues.

"If the league continues to try to clamp down on supporters in order to make it safe for TV, they may be killing one of the coolest things about the league, which is the passionate support that is just a little bit freewheeling, and just a little bit over the edge and 'I'm not quite sure what they're going to do next and that's kind of scary and kind of cool,'" she said. "On another level, I'm afraid they're going to drive away some people who don't need to be driven away from one more thing."

For this protest, there's no end in sight.

England 23 for 1 trail Australia 497 for 8 (Smith 211, Labuschagne 67) by 474 runs

For about two overs on the second day at Old Trafford, Steven Smith looked fallible as he resumed his comeback innings after yesterday's preamble half-century. Stuart Broad found his edge with his first ball of the day, then induced that rarest of aberrations, a waft outside off from his second.

Moments later, it appeared that Smith's neurotic focus had found the root of his discomfort - a rogue van's windscreen, visible through the slenderest of gaps in a gate behind the bowler's arm, and winking at him with unfathomable persistence, much as the North Star might after one too many disco biscuits.

But even after a towel had been lodged under the wipers to block out the glare, Smith was unable to settle immediately, and three balls into Jofra Archer's first over of the day, he pumped a low full toss at a catchable height through the bowler's outstretched fingers and away to the boundary for four. A final, flighty fence past leg stump followed. And there and then, England knew, deep in their souls, that their window of opportunity had clanged shut.

Fidget, shuffle, nudge, smack. Rinse. Repeat. Back and across, coiled like a pinball launcher, way outside off if needs be, to clip a perfectly decent ball off the hip, or to pongo onto the front foot for another freakishly emphatic drive, bat pointing to the precise patch of grass that he had targeted, rubbing in his genius while simply completing the arc of his stroke.

For the remainder of his 263-ball, 497-minute stay, Smith batted as if he had never been away - which, but for that delivery from Archer at Lord's, he might indeed never have been. Once again, he encountered an opposition that ran out of plans and patience in equal measure, as he found sufficient support from, first, Tim Paine and then Mitchell Starc to leave England praying for more rain to assist the series-extending draw that is surely now the limit of their ambitions.

By the time he eventually fell for 211, reverse-sweeping the part-time spin of Joe Root (having frogmarched England's frontline bowlers to the brink of that inevitable declaration), Smith had racked up a nonsensical haul of 589 runs in four innings, at an average of 147.25 that would have been closer to 200 but for his brave but unwise decision to resume that Lord's knock while displaying the early signs of concussion.

And by the close, the ease of Smith's own progress had been put into stark perspective by the agonised extraction of England's own erstwhile No.4, Joe Denly. Promoted to open due to Jason Roy's clear unsuitability for the task, Denly endured for 23 balls and four sketchily gathered runs, before stabbing Pat Cummins into the midriff of Matthew Wade at short leg, who snaffled the rebound brilliantly in one hand, diving to his right.

The difference between Australia's focus and England's was as visible in that final half-an-hour with the ball as it had been for so long with Smith's bat. Starc, armed with the new ball after stewing on the sidelines for three Tests, looked as "cherry-ripe" as Archer in particular has looked fatigued in this contest, while his fellow quicks, Josh Hazlewood and Cummins, were no less eager to show what can yet be achieved on this surface.

But it was the energy in the field was the most palpable difference. For if England could be excused for being blown off-track by the howling gales of the first truncated day, today's (largely) blue skies robbed them of any mitigation. They needed to be at their best on a pivotal day of the series, but they were by and large as poor as they've been all summer.

Smith's first century of the day, his third of the series, was a formality - ushered through with a misfield at square leg, and celebrated with a pointed wave of the bat that doubled as a "hello, I'm back". It was his fifth in his last eight innings against England, his 11th in Ashes cricket, and his 26th in 67 Tests all told. Comparisons with Don Bradman have long been sacrilege in Test cricket, but the relentless weight of these numbers are starting to scotch all complaints.

There was, however, one moment that stood head and shoulders above all England's other errors. Jack Leach has had a storied summer - that 92 as a nightwatchman at Lord's, that most glorious of 1 not outs at Headingley last week. And with the ball, all things considered, he was probably second only to the toiling Broad as England's most probing option of the day.

But when, with Smith on 118 and showing another fleeting glimpse of mortality against his relative kryptonite of left-arm spin, Leach found the edge of his bat with a flighted, dipping, ripping delivery that sent every data analyst in the game into raptures, the moment was immediately lost as replays showed that he had overstepped by a good half an inch.

A spinner's no-ball is one of cricket's unforgivable sins, and traumatically for Leach it was only his 13th out of more than 15,000 in his career. But what a delivery to serve one up on. Smith turned on his heel, marching back to resume his innings through a phalanx of crestfallen fielders, who were immediately torn a strip by a livid Joe Root, desperately trying to lift some flat-lining standards. But once again, that window of opportunity was already shut.

The absence of Smith, after all, would have meant the presence of another not-Smith - but even the less impossible task of making dents in the rest of the batting order proved to be beyond England, at least at the first grasp. Earlier in the day, Matthew Wade had gifted his wicket with a foul slog to mid-on, where Root clung onto a swirling chance that left him white with relief, but when the under-pressure Tim Paine arrived to replace him, the equally under-pressure Roy dropped a shocker at second slip, the ball barely hitting the heel of his palm before plopping to the turf to leave Broad, the bowler, apoplectic.

Paine is without a first-class century in 12 years, and is increasingly lacking in mandate as Australia captain now that Smith, for all his sins, is so clearly restored as the team's front-man. His removal for 9 would have left him with a highest score of 34 in seven innings. But instead he found the resolve to grind through to a cathartic half-century, albeit that he required another let-off to get there, as Sam Curran - briefly on the field for Ben Stokes - dropped a low pull at mid-on on 49 as Archer bent his back in the best spell of his wicketless innings.

Paine didn't last much longer - he nicked a fine legcutter from Craig Overton's first ball after tea to depart for 56 - but his presence had augmented Smith's dominance of a stand of 145, and though Pat Cummins didn't linger long, Starc's eagerness to get involved in the series manifested itself in the ideal tailender's innings.

His 54 from 58 balls included seven fours and two sixes, but began as a keen supporting role, just 6 runs from 23 until Smith's double-century gave him licence to unleash the long handle. Broad was hacked for four fours in a row to kickstart a helter-skelter finale that might have carried on to the close against a despondent attack, had Paine not waved them in with half-an-hour of the day to go.

By then, of course, Smith was gone - an event so rare that it would have justified on of the Don's bespoke "He's Out!" billboards, had the Manchester Evening News deemed it worthy to publish a special edition. His nudge behind square off Broad pushed him ever further into into the elite of Ashes combatants, with only the Don himself (EIGHT!) and Wally Hammond (4) having recorded more double-hundreds in the game's oldest rivalry.

Either way, his series tally is 589 runs from four innings, one of which was effectively sawn off by concussion. And now, after this latest masterclass, the only dizziness on display is that being induced by the vertigo of his statistics, and the bewilderment of an England opposition that must now be believing that Headingley was a fever-dream after all.

It looked, for a moment, like the perfect delivery. Not just a perfect delivery, but a perfectly executed plan.

Jack Leach, bowling round the wicket, had drawn Steve Smith forward and, having found just a little drift into him, gained just enough turn away from him to see the ball take the edge of the bat and carry to slip. Smith had already scored 118 by then but, such is his form and so great his dominance, England might have settled for that. Besides, Australia were 273 for 6 and England could, perhaps, anticipate bowling them out for little more than 320.

But then came the replays. And after that came the realisation. Leach, despite the most gentle of run-ups, despite bowling at a 51 mph, had over stepped. Smith was reprieved and England's joy turned to despair. We may look back on it as the tipping point in this series.

Maybe that's unfair on both Leach and Smith. Certainly Leach, at times, bowled really nicely. His misjudgement was, it its way, tiny: no more than a rash shot from a batsman or a dropped catch from a fielder. But the consequences were significant and it was avoidable. An unforced error, as they say in tennis.

Most of all, when we come to reflect on this series in years to come, we'll almost certainly conclude that the difference between the sides was one man: Smith. England have thrown pretty much everything they have at him in not just this series but the previous couple. The fact is, while most other batsmen have struggled, Smith has gorged on runs. Yes, the pitches might have offered England more assistance. And yes, James Anderson's availability might have tested Smith more. But to a large extent, England just have to accept he has been too good for them.

There will be nagging irritation, however, that England did not do themselves justice. For there were moments on the second day when they became more than a little ragged in the field. Tim Paine was also reprieved twice - he was dropped on 9 and 49, once at slip by Jason Roy and once at mid-on by substitute fielder Sam Curran; both relatively straightforward chances - with Jofra Archer also missing a tough caught and bowled chance offered by Smith when he had 65. England keep dropping catches. Leach's no-ball is a symptom of a wider malaise.

Most of all, England didn't seem able to build or sustain pressure in the field. With Ben Stokes, suffering from a sore shoulder, unable to replicate the match-shaping spell he produced in Leeds and Smith managing to manoeuvre the ball into the gaps with his unique skill, England leaked 124 runs in 32 wicketless overs after lunch.

Archer, only five months into his England career, already looks as if he is in danger of being ruined - news that he required a pain-killing injection after normal play in the World Cup final and before the super-over should have alarm bells ringing - with his pace dropping by the match. Not for the first time in this series, it seemed England's captain, Joe Root, had no way of lifting his team and no answers to the questions raised by Smith. It was agony from an England perspective; a session where you could feel their Ashes hopes slipping away.

And then there's that no-ball. Spinners - certainly finger spinners with a gentle approach to the crease, shouldn't be bowling no-balls. Ravi Ashwin, for example, has never bowled a no-ball in Test cricket. And while Moeen Ali has, they have all been head high full tosses rather than front-foot no-balls. In all, finger spinners have, on average, bowled one no-ball - including head-high no-balls - every 1,236 deliveries in Test cricket since the start of 2010. Leach has now bowled 1,566 deliveries in Test cricket and 13 no-balls.

So while we must be careful not to pin too much blame on Leach - he's not responsible for England's enduring inability to bat, or catch, after all - we can't just dismiss it as 'one of those things.' That's too cosy; that's too laissez-faire. For we know that, in ODI cricket, England went more than 10,000 deliveries without conceding a front-foot no-ball. We know that, if there are free-hits at stake and they make it a priority, it can be done. But in training in recent days, England's bowlers have regularly over-stepped in the nets without any of the coaching staff acting as umpires and notifying them of their error. As a consequence, instead of good habits becoming ingrained, bad habits can take root. It seems just a bit sloppy and just a bit unnecessary. The team management have to take some responsibility.

England's issues extend beyond playing matters. At some stage, if England are to make any meaningful use of home advantage, Ashley Giles, the director of England's men's cricket, will have to improve the communication between the team and the groundsmen.

England turned up in Manchester expecting to find a hard pitch offering pace and carry. Just as they turned up for the World Cup final expecting a batting paradise. On both occasions - and several more in between - they have been disappointed. Indeed, one member of the England team management noted that this surface - offering little of the grass coverage that might have encouraged England's seamers - would have delighted Australia. If England are to have any hope of dismissing Smith, they require lateral movement and the carry to ensure nicks make it to slip. They didn't really have either here.

Everyone understands that the job of groundsmen is desperately tough, with poor weather and an unrelenting schedule combining to reduce preparation time. But at some stage it would surely make sense for the left hand to know what the right hand is doing in English cricket. It would surely make sense for Giles to make it clear what groundsmen are expected to provide and hold them accountable if they do not.

England's Ashes hopes aren't over yet. Not quite. They only need to escape with a draw here to make it to The Oval with their chances alive and it may well be that poor weather comes to their aid. But, for the second Test in a row, you get the impression they're going to require something special to keep them in it. They can't keep expecting Stokes to bail out their substandard batting and fielding.

Believe it or not, Steven Smith batted badly today, at least to start with.

His first couple of overs were redolent of those passages in which, as he has described it, he forgets how to hold the bat. There was an edge short of the slips first ball, a couple of balls beating the bat, an inside edge past the stumps, and a dropped return catch by Jofra Archer when Smith bunted a full toss back towards the bowler who by the end of the day was still to dismiss him in a Test match.

The fact that missed chance strolled on down the ground to the boundary, meaning Smith had still scored 10 runs from those ropey first two overs, rather suggested that this would be his day. He had, on day one, already proven that there were to be no after-effects from his Lord's concussion and Headingley absence, save for a change in bouncer evasion technique against Archer and the successful adaptation to wearing a stem guard on the back of his helmet. In this he had plenty of help from Marnus Labuschagne, during a stand of 116 that gave Australia a foothold.

But more needed to be done on day two, offering as it did far less likelihood of rain breaks, against an England bowling attack of uncertain stamina if they could be ground down. Smith, beyond his early jitters, returned to the combination of calm combat against each ball and exaggerated "eccentric stuff", as he calls it, after. What he needed more than anything were batting partners, not something that he had been able to find in ready supply so far.

Early in the day, the major obstacles for Australia's left-handed batsmen were again on display, as Stuart Broad bent the ball fiendishly away from the bat after angling it in from around the wicket. Both Travis Head and Matthew Wade had plenty of now familiar difficulties against this angle of attack, and while they were there a wicket never seemed far away. Vitally, though, Head and Wade each hung around long enough for stands of 39 and 41, not much but enough to prevent England from generating the rush of wickets they needed.

And even though Wade's unsuccessful attempt to hammer Jack Leach into Stretford ended with a skied catch to Joe Root and much gnashing of teeth about his choice of shot - not least among those who may have preferred the retention of Usman Khawaja - his innings allowed Tim Paine to walk to the wicket facing spin and an old ball. In averaging little more than 12 for the series so far, Paine had made a point of spending extra time on his batting leading into this match, after the fashion of none other than Smith.

On match eve he was the last man in the nets for Australia, working against left-arm spin throwdowns from the assistant coach Sridharan Sriram. They returned to the same spot bright and early the following morning, before the rest of the team had even arrived on the bus from central Manchester, trying to find the key to a better score than those of 5, 34, 23, 4, 11 and 0 he had managed over the first three Tests.

What was soon clear, for both Paine and Smith, was that they had the opportunity to put the match more or less beyond England in terms of victory. The home side's bowlers were looking increasingly sloppy, and fatigued, the fielders similar, while Ben Stokes was fighting not only a tired body but a sore bowling shoulder. As a result, their cricket was far from England's most exacting this series, personified by how Archer's speed and venom was demonstrably down, frustrated too by the fact that his short ball was being much better read by Smith.

Here could also be seen the benefits Smith reaped from how the Australians had acquitted themselves without him at Headingley, putting 30-odd more overs into both Archer and Broad to contribute to an overall series ledger that always looked likely to favour Australia's deeper battery of pace options. If the conditions at Lord's had been more favourable for Archer against Smith, then so too had his preparation. By the time their battle was rejoined, Smith was facing a bowler experiencing the brutality of a long Test series for the first time in his life.

It would not, of course, have been this bewitching series without a moment of sliding doors, leaving both sides pondering the consequences. They arrived when Paine was dropped by Jason Roy in the slips immediately after the interval, and again when Smith, having glided to a third century of the series before lunch, threw his hands at a Leach delivery that turned away nicely, drawing the edge straight to Stokes at slip.

Stokes, already frustrated by how the day had gone, hurled the ball angrily into the ground by way of celebration; he soon had cause to repeat the act, only with a little more anger. When the umpires went upstairs to check, there was nothing of Leach's front foot behind the crease either raised or grounded, allowing Smith the fortune of turning on his heels and walking back to re-mark his guard.

That moment was both sapping for England and restorative for Paine and Smith, who took their stand to 145, the highest of the series, and underlined how Australia's captain generally deals in key partnerships as opposed to large individual scores. When he finally fell for 57, first ball after tea, it was Paine's 30th consecutive score of 50 or more in first-class matches that had not got as far as three figures. Annoying as that may be for him, his contribution was exactly what Smith had needed.

All that remained was for Smith, equal parts quirk and command, to stride to the third Ashes double century of his career - only Sir Donald Bradman (eight) and Wally Hammond (four) have more. His grinding down of England's bowlers, interspersed with the regular flourishes of 24 boundaries and two sixes, served to soften up the ground so effectively that Mitchell Starc was able to hammer a brisk half-century in the closing overs of Australia's innings.

Smith reckoned that Paine was at his best as a batsman when he was trying to score as much as survive.

"We kept talking in the middle about building that partnership, just keep trying to put as many runs on the board as possible in that partnership," Smith said.

"I thought Tim played exceptionally well today. He came out with a really positive mind-set, put away the loose balls, defended the good balls, left the balls that he had to leave and was really disciplined. But he had that positive mind-set of really hitting the ball, and when Tim's got that, that's when he's batting at his best. That was a good partnership.

"And then Starcy as well came out and did the same. He hit the middle of the bat a lot, played some beautiful straight drives in the air and along the ground and that's pleasing to see. We've seen how lower-order runs have been in big Ashes games. The fact that he's been able to work on his batting during the three games he hasn't played in so far, to come out and do that just shows a sign of someone who wants to get better and play their part for the team."

Save for Bradman, no-one can boast of more Test runs after 121 innings than Smith's 6,678, a tally that for now has granted him the neat average of 64.64. His genius has been undimmed by the Lord's blow, and perhaps even enhanced. His dealing with the Archer short ball has improved markedly, and he was able to find enormous reserves of concentration that if anything would have been refreshed by the time out of Leeds.

What Smith needed most, however, were allies. And in this innings, much to Australia's relief, he was able to find them. The Ashes, once again, look close to their keeping.